New York University Skip to Content Skip to Search Skip to Navigation Skip to Sub Navigation

Meeting Minutes Spring 2014

Meeting of May 19, 2014

AGENDA

1. Revisions to the final report

Read the Minutes for May 19, 2014

AGENDA

1. Revisions to the final report

Present: Joshua Blank, Richard Cole, Tom Delaney, Gigi Dopico-Black, Carol Hutchins, Larry Jackson, Ben Maddox, Ted Magder, Rick Matasar, Russ Neuman, Jan Plass, Ryan Poynter, Matthew Santirocco, Lisa Springer,

Joined via teleconference: Tom Augst, Barbara Krainovich-Miller, Joyce O’Connor.

MINUTES

1. Final report.

The committee used this meeting to make revisions to its final report, with particular focus on the use of technology to support global learning.

The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.

Meeting of May 15, 2014

AGENDA

1. Fall conference

2. Revisions to the final report

Read the Minutes for May 15, 2014

AGENDA

1. Fall conference

2. Revisions to the final report

Present: Mark Alter, Richard Cole, Tom Delaney, Gigi Dopico-Black, Larry Jackson, Ben Maddox, Ted Magder, Rick Matasar, Peggy McCready, Russ Neuman, Jan Plass, Ryan Poynter, Shankar Prasad, Matthew Santirocco, Clay Shirky, Lisa Springer, Peter Schilling,

Joined via teleconference: Carol Hutchins, Barbara Krainovich-Miller, Marc Triola.

MINUTES

1. Fall conference

Rick Matasar asked the group to identify five to ten people from their schools who should attend the committee’s fall conference on technology-enhanced education. Clay Shirky suggested that the committee not only invite these colleagues to attend the conference, but also ask them to promote the conference to others.

2. Final report

The rest of the meeting was devoted to revising the committee’s final report. The group also considered how to promote the report. It was agreed that the fall conference could be used to enhance the report’s visibility in the NYU community.

The meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m.

Meeting of May 8, 2014

AGENDA

1. Revisions to the final report

Read the Minutes for May 8, 2014

AGENDA

1. Revisions to the final report

Present: Richard Cole, Tom Delaney, Carol Hutchins, Larry Jackson, Rick Matasar, Peggy McCready, Russ Neuman, Joyce O’Connor, Ryan Poynter, Matthew Santirocco, Peter Schilling, Clay Shirky, Lisa Springer,

Joined via teleconference: Tom Augst, Gigi Dopico-Black.

MINUTES

1. Final report.

The committee used the meeting to make revisions to its final report.

The meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m.

Meeting of April 29, 2014

AGENDA

1. Revisions to the final report

Read the Minutes for April 29, 2014

AGENDA

1. Revisions to the final report

Present: Mark Alter, Joshua Blank, Richard Cole, Rick Matasar, Russ Neuman, Dan O’Sullivan, Ryan Poynter, Peter Schilling.

Joined via teleconference: Barbara Krainovich-Miller, Joyce O’Connor, Marc Triola.

MINUTES

1. Final report.

The committee used this meeting to make revisions to its final report.

The meeting adjourned at 12:00 noon.

Meeting of April 23, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements and approval of the minutes

2. Follow-up on the meeting with the Trustees' Committee on Online Education and Technology

3. Discussion of our final report—continued

4. Reports

a. Fall conference (Russ Neuman)

b. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox and Tom Augst)

5. Updating our committee website

a. Updating our bibliography of TEE-related articles (Ben Maddox)

b. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)

c. Adding links to the "TEE Sampler" page

6. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

Read the Minutes for April 23, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements and approval of the minutes

2. Follow-up on the meeting with the Trustees' Committee on Online Education and Technology

3. Discussion of our final report—continued

4. Reports

a. Fall conference (Russ Neuman)

b. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox and Tom Augst)

5. Updating our committee website

a. Updating our bibliography of TEE-related articles (Ben Maddox)

b. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)

c. Adding links to the "TEE Sampler" page

6. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

Present: Mark Alter, Richard Cole, Tom Delaney, Carol Hutchins, Larry Jackson, Ben Maddox, Rick Matasar, Peggy McCready, Russ Neuman, Jan Plass, Ryan Poynter, Matthew Santirocco, Peter Schilling, Clay Shirky, Lisa Springer.

Joined via teleconference: Barbara Krainovich-Miller, Joyce O’Connor, Marc Triola.

MINUTES

1. Announcements

a. Additional meetings. Matthew Santirocco asked the committee to schedule three or four additional meetings so that it could finish revising its final report, and also discuss its promotion and distribution. It was agreed that a Doodle poll would be sent to the group to determine their availability. [Subsequent to this meeting, the committee agreed to the following dates: April 29 at 11:00 a.m., May 8 at 1:00 p.m., May 15 at 1:00 p.m. and May 19 at 3:00 p.m.]

b. Conference planning. Noting that personal outreach from committee members would be the most effective way to promote the fall conference to faculty at the University, Matthew asked the group to think about who should attend the conference and how best to reach them.

2. Meeting with the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology

Rick Matasar asked the committee for feedback on its April 10 meeting with the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology. The group was overwhelmingly positive. Matthew noted that Tom Augst had suggested recording versions of the presentations that committee members made to the Trustees, and posting them on a website. Rick observed that the Trustee committee will continue to meet next year and will want the continued involvement of faculty at the University. He asked the group to think about ways this can happen once the FTEE committee disbands, and to share their ideas over email.

3. Final report

The committee had a robust discussion about the latest draft of its final report, focusing first on the report’s recommendations. Noting that they seemed too general or vague, Clay Shirky suggested making the recommendations more concrete. Mark Alter urged the committee to make its recommendation about governance even more inclusive by encouraging broad-based participation in decision-making about technology-enhanced education. Rick asked the committee to consider how to group its recommendations, and whether any should be eliminated or added.

The discussion then turned to the report’s stated principles. Russ Neuman expressed some disappointment that an earlier recommendation regarding experimentation had been dropped from this latest draft. He added that experimentation should be, along with subsidiarity, one of the report’s stated principles. Rick observed that the recommendation was removed only because it was thought to be too specific for this section, but that it is included elsewhere in the report. When Clay suggested adding communication as a third principle, Russ noted that the report’s recommendation for a standing committee on technology-enhanced education addressed this issue.

The report’s target audience was yet another topic of discussion. When Mark suggested that the report attempted to address too many constituencies at the University, Clay recommended organizing it by units rather than topics, so that readers could immediately see which of the report’s recommendations were relevant to them. Russ suggested instead creating a website that would allow the report’s information to be filtered by constituency. Lisa Springer noted that readers would also consult the report to understand better what the future holds for higher education. Noting that there is a new sense of urgency to the committee’s work, Rick suggested that the report’s recommendations should take into consideration the major impact that economic and technological changes will have on the University over the next five years. Matthew added the importance of thinking about how technology can also mitigate short-term disruptions to academic continuity (e.g., inclement weather, avian flu).

The meeting adjourned at 12:00 noon.

Meeting of March 27, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements and approval of the minutes

2. Planning the agenda for the meeting with the Trustees’ Committee on Online Education and Technology—continued

3. Discussion of our final report—continued

4. Our committee website

a. Updating our bibliography of TEE-related articles (Ben Maddox)
b. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)
c. Adding links to the “TEE Sampler” page

5. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

6. Reports

a. Fall conference (Russ Neuman)
b. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox and Tom Augst)
c. Report on the Common Solutions Group (CSG) conference in San Diego, January 2014 (Ben Maddox)

Read the Committee Minutes for March 27, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements and approval of the minutes

2. Planning the agenda for the meeting with the Trustees’ Committee on Online Education and Technology—continued

3. Discussion of our final report—continued

4. Our committee website

a. Updating our bibliography of TEE-related articles (Ben Maddox)
b. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)
c. Adding links to the “TEE Sampler” page

5. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

6. Reports

a. Fall conference (Russ Neuman)
b. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox and Tom Augst)
c. Report on the Common Solutions Group (CSG) conference in San Diego, January 2014 (Ben Maddox)

Present: Mark Alter, Joshua Blank, Carol Hutchins, Larry Jackson, Ben Maddox, Ted Magder, Rick Matasar, Peggy McCready, Joyce O’Connor, Dan O’Sullivan, Ryan Poynter, Matthew Santirocco.

Joined via teleconference: Tom Augst, Barbara Krainovich-Miller.

MINUTES 

1. Announcements

a. Fall conference. Rick Matasar reported that the planning subcommittee for the fall conference has been meeting, and has finalized September 12, as the date for the event. He then noted that the committee members could help determine what constituencies at the University should participate in the conference, and suggest ways of engaging them.

b. LMS survey. Matthew Santirocco announced that a brief survey would be distributed to faculty to ascertain what their experience has been with the University’s learning management system (LMS), NYU Classes. The survey should also help the University understand why some faculty are not already using this system.

2. Meeting with the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology

The group then discussed its upcoming meeting with the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology [which took place subsequent to this meeting on April 10]. It was agreed that the committee would discuss with the Trustees some of the topics it has been reviewing and the recommendations it has been developing for its final report, and also highlight what some of the schools are doing in the area of technology-enhanced education.

3. Final report

Matthew shared with the committee over 20 recommendations grouped into six categories that came out of the committee’s meetings over the past year. He proposed using these as a starting point for the committee’s final report. Noting that these recommendations will be read independently of the rest of the report, Ted Magder stressed the importance of making them both succinct and open-ended, so that they are capable of standing on their own, but won’t be mistaken for the fuller elaborations that will be found elsewhere in the document. The group agreed that the recommendations should avoid being too specific, but should also offer a limited number of examples when helpful. To that end, several committee members proposed some revisions to the recommendations.

The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

 

Meeting of March 6, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements and approval of the minutes

2. Planning the agenda for the meeting with the Trustees' Committee on Online Education and Technology

3. Discussion of our final report--continued

a. Missing consultation forms

b. Capturing the results of our committee's fall consultations with faculty in the schools

4. Our committee website

a. Adding links to the "TEE Sampler" page

b. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)

5. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

6. Reports

a. Fall conference (Russ Neuman)

b. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox and Tom Augst)

c. Report on the Common Solutions Group (CSG) conference in San Diego, January 2014 (Ben Maddox)

Read the Committee Minutes for March 6, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements and approval of the minutes

2. Planning the agenda for the meeting with the Trustees' Committee on Online Education and Technology

3. Discussion of our final report--continued

a. Missing consultation forms

b. Capturing the results of our committee's fall consultations with faculty in the schools

4. Our committee website

a. Adding links to the "TEE Sampler" page

b. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)

5. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

6. Reports

a. Fall conference (Russ Neuman)

b. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox and Tom Augst)

c. Report on the Common Solutions Group (CSG) conference in San Diego, January 2014 (Ben Maddox)

Present: Mark Alter, Richard Cole, Tom Delaney, Gigi Dopico-Black, Carol Hutchins, Ben Maddox, Ted Magder, Rick Matasar, Peggy McCready, Russ Neuman, Peter Schilling, Clay Shirky.

Joined via teleconference: Tom Augst, Larry Jackson, Barbara Krainovich-Miller, Ryan Poynter, Matthew Santirocco.

MINUTES

1. Faculty consultations

Matthew Santirocco (who co-chaired the committee via videoconference from our DC Center) asked the group to submit any outstanding reports from their consultations with the faculty. Noting that the dates and venues of the consultations have already been documented, he suggested that a brief summary of the issues that faculty raised should be sufficient. When Gigi Dopico-Black asked whether faculty consultations could continue after the fall conference, Matthew suggested making this a specific recommendation in the committee’s final report. Rick Matasar added that the final report should also recommend a more permanent, school-based structure for maintaining these consultations.

2. Meeting with the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology

Rick announced that the date for our committee’s meeting with the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology has now been confirmed. The purpose of the meeting will be for the Trustees to gain a better sense of how faculty in the various schools are thinking about technology-enhanced education. The committee discussed the best format for the meeting, which goals they would like to accomplish, and which topics to address, including which parts of the forthcoming report might be emphasized. It was agreed that a detailed agenda should be circulated among all participants in advance of the meeting. The group was also reminded that a number of materials are on the FTEE website, including the inventory of technology-enhanced courses, the best practices documents, and the FAQs, which everyone can review prior to the meeting with the Trustees.

3. Final report

The group discussed the deadline for its final report, agreeing that it should be finished before the end of the semester. To that end, Ted suggested (based on his work chairing another committee) that our committee should come to a consensus on its recommendations and work backwards from there. 

The meeting adjourned at 12:00 noon.

Meeting of February 20, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements

a. Report on the NYU Board of Trustees' Committee on Online Education and Technology

b. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

c. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)

d. Report on the Common Solutions Group (CSG) conference in San Diego, January 2014 (Ben Maddox)

2. Communications strategy

a. How do we ensure that faculty are aware of new service initiatives and online materials (e.g., ESMITS and the new "TEE sampler" website)?

3. Progress reports on continuing subcommittees or conversations

a. Assessment (Russ Neuman)

b. Spring conference (Russ Neuman)

c. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox)

4. Shape of our final report--continued

Read the Committee Minutes for February 20, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements

a.Report on the NYU Board of Trustees' Committee on Online Education and Technology

b. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

c. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)

d. Report on the Common Solutions Group (CSG) conference in San Diego, January 2014 (Ben Maddox)

2. Communications strategy

a. How do we ensure that faculty are aware of new service initiatives and online materials (e.g., ESMITS and the new "TEE sampler" website)?

3. Progress reports on continuing subcommittees or conversations

a. Assessment (Russ Neuman)

b. Spring conference (Russ Neuman)

c. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox)

4. Shape of our final report--continued

Present: Joshua Blank, Tom Delaney, Carol Hutchins, Larry Jackson, Ben Maddox, Rick Matasar, Peggy McCready, Russ Neuman, Joyce O’Connor, Ryan Poynter, Shankar Prasad, Matthew Santirocco, Peter Schilling, Clay Shirky.

Joined via teleconference: Gigi Dopico-Black, Barbara Krainovich-Miller, Marc Triola.

MINUTES

1. Meeting with the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology

Rick Matasar informed the group that the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology has asked to meet with our faculty committee to learn more about our perspectives on technology-enhanced learning at the University. Possible dates for the meeting are March 10 through 13, and April 8 through 10. The group expressed enthusiasm for the idea. Rick will follow up with the co-chairs of the Trustee Committee to come up with a date and agenda.

2. Progress reports

a. Fall conference. Russ Neuman reported that the conference planning subcommittee has met twice and has drafted a proposed schedule and list of topics for this all-date event. He also explained that, because of space constraints on campus, the group had to reschedule the conference from this spring to next fall: it will now take place on either September 12 or September 19 in the Eisner and Luben Auditorium in the Kimmel Center. The space will allow up to 400 participants to attend four 50-minute plenary sessions, as well as a keynote talk, while exhibits and demonstrations take place in nearby rooms and in the balcony area. The committee agreed that the panel discussions should feature only two or three speakers, and should leave time for extensive audience comments and questions. Rick suggested using Twitter or phone-based polling technology to enhance audience participation.

The committee then considered who should participate in the conference. Russ noted that that the subcommittee’s plan was to organize the event for members of the NYU community, though he added that a high-profile keynote speaker could attract a wider audience and perhaps even some press attention. Clay Shirky suggested that it would be wise to limit press exposure so that members of the NYU community can have a more frank conversation focused on technology-enhanced learning at this University. Gigi Dopico-Black noted the importance of creating a space at the conference that would be primarily for faculty. When Josh Blank asked how faculty would be invited to the conference, Gigi suggested that the organizers could send targeted invitations to both faculty leaders and skeptics on campus. Shankar Prasad noted that faculty at Wagner would also like to have support staff attend, since they provide frontline support for faculty using technology in the classroom. Matthew Santirocco noted, and the committee agreed, that while specific individuals could be invited, the event should be publicized to the entire NYU community.

The committee then considered how to include NYU Abu Dhabi and NYU Shanghai in the conference. Noting that the global clock will preclude synchronous participation at the portal campuses, Rick suggested that the group not think of the conference as a single event, but instead as the beginning of an ongoing dialogue. Carol Hutchins suggested that creating opportunities for follow-up conversations should be woven into the conference planning.

Summarizing the conversation, Matthew asked the subcommittee to explore five topics at its next meeting: a) Portal campus participation in the fall conference; b) conference exhibits and displays; c) panel participants; d) strategies for encouraging a follow-up dialogue; and e) strategies for using crowdsourcing to enhance participation.

b. Faculty innovation. Ben Maddox asked the group to share any technology-enhanced learning projects that they are currently working on so they can be added to the growing inventory of such courses at the University. Rick noted that there are over 40 new projects underway at the University, varying in scope and progress. Noting the importance of developing a communications strategy for sharing ideas with faculty, Matthew asked the committee to discuss at an upcoming meeting how best to keep the inventory up-to-date, and how to communicate effectively with our community about what is happening in this area. He mentioned, e.g., the new website of sample projects (exhibits) in which NYU faculty have been engaged. [Subsequently, the link was circulated. It is https://sites.google.com/a/nyu.edu/global-learning-and-innovation-gli/]

3. Final report

Matthew noted that the outline of the committee’s final report is still being revised, and that an expanded version will be available in time for the next meeting. Russ agreed to write a brief section on assessment. Clay suggested making the final report the main priority of the committee’s next meeting, since the report will be one of the items that the Trustee Committee on Online Education and Technology will want to discuss.

The meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m.

 

Meeting of February 5, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements

a. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

b. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)

c. Report on the Common Solutions Group (CSG) conference in San Diego, January 2014 (Ben Maddox)

d. How to promote ESMITS and (now) the new “TEE sampler” website?

2. Shape of our final report

3. Progress reports on continuing subcommittees or conversations

a. Assessment (Russ Neuman)

b. Spring conference (Russ Neuman)

c. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox)

Read the Committee Minutes for February 5, 2014

AGENDA

1. Announcements

a. Videoconferencing (VC) classrooms (Peter Schilling)

b. Updating the inventory of online/hybrid courses and programs (Peter Schilling)

c. Report on the Common Solutions Group (CSG) conference in San Diego, January 2014 (Ben Maddox)

d. How to promote ESMITS and (now) the new “TEE sampler” website?

2. Shape of our final report

3. Progress reports on continuing subcommittees or conversations

a. Assessment (Russ Neuman)

b. Spring conference (Russ Neuman)

c. Promoting faculty collaboration and experimentation (Ben Maddox)

Present: Richard Cole, Tom Delaney, Gigi Dopico-Black, Rick Matasar, Russ Neuman, Ryan Poynter, Matthew Santirocco, Peter Schilling, Clay Shirky, Lisa Springer.

Joined via teleconference: Mark Alter, Tom Augst, Barbara Krainovich-Miller, Peggy McCready, Joyce O’Connor, Shankar Prasad.

MINUTES

1. Shape of our final report

This meeting was devoted to a preliminary discussion of the final report. Matthew Santirocco and Rick Matasar circulated a draft outline of the report, which Ryan Poynter had drawn up using the minutes of previous committee meetings. The structure of the outline resembled the draft report of the Faculty Advisory Committee on NYU’s Global Network insofar as it not only articulated some basic principles but also identified a number of “tensions” (many of which had emerged during the fall meetings), and proposed some recommendations.

Committee members offered a number of suggestions for revisions. Clay Shirky, for example, observed that the outline seemed to offer too much background information, some of which could be eliminated. He also noted (and several other committee members agreed) that mentions of the role of technology in research could be threaded throughout the report, since faculty will look to the report for guidance in how technology-enhanced teaching might overlap with their research. Mark Alter suggested that, wherever possible, the report should be organized in such a way that, for every principle that the committee articulates, there is a corresponding tension and recommendation. Tom Augst stressed the need to address the training of graduate students in the report, since this is a part of NYU’s teaching mission. Gigi Dopico-Black cautioned against overemphasizing the notion of tensions in the system around tech-enhanced education, noting that the result of this might be to exacerbate or even create such tensions. Finally, Lisa Springer proposed adding a “values statement” at the beginning of the report, since many readers will be unfamiliar with some of the assumptions that we are making. Tom observed that this section could be drawn from (or else direct readers to) the committee’s best practices documents, since these are, in essence, value statements.

Matthew and Rick agreed to revise the draft and to share a new version of the outline with the committee at its next meeting on February 20, at which time, other items on the running agenda could also be covered.

The meeting adjourned at 12 noon.

NYU Footer